Sax on the Web Forum banner

The Ultimate "Otto Link Identification" Thread

117K views 192 replies 80 participants last post by  mrpeebee 
#1 ·
Hi all --

there is a lot of great information here in this forum on Otto Link mouthpieces (e.g., posts by Doc Tenney and a thread by unbalancedaction) and in other places (such as Theo Wanne's web site, which is fantastic). However, a lot of people are still confused about the different flavors/models of metal Links. This is evident in about half of all Florida Links advertised on Ebay actually being Early Babbitts (as example).

So I made an attempt trying to identify Otto Link mouthpieces using a novel approach:

"The Otto Link Zoo" (pdf / jpg)
:idea1:


Geeky, huh? :mrgreen:

Please let me know if you find this useful, and send me omissions/mistakes.

Cheers!
 
See less See more
1
#2 ·
Its "Hawkins Special", not "Hawking".

Im assuming its a typo, but, if its not, its named for Coleman Hawkins--a person, of whom it is more important for you (or any saxophonist) to know about than vintage mpcs.

Like Phil Barone says, we all need to practice & listen more, on here, than thinking about equipment, knowing Hawkins & his music is a good start.
 
#3 · (Edited)
That's a typo, of course (probably because I know Stephen Hawking in person).

No need to lecture me about the importance of playing, I am well aware of that.
 
#13 ·
I like this a lot, but I have something to add:

I have an STM for bari that does not have the facing number on the body, nor does it have the number in the usual place on the shank (i.e., on the same side as the table). Instead, the number is on the back of the shank. The piece does not resemble the modern STMs for bari that I have seen and played. It has a wider beak, longer rollover baffle, thinner rails, and the chamber and sidewalls are slightly more scooped out. I think it is a "transitional" Babbitt piece but I can't verify that. All I know is that the thing sounds and plays like butter.
 
#17 ·
What I'm saying is that the "number on back of shank" STM is not represented in the chart and maybe it should be. I can send you some pics if you want to see it.

bfoster64 said:
I like this a lot, but I have something to add:

I have an STM for bari that does not have the facing number on the body, nor does it have the number in the usual place on the shank (i.e., on the same side as the table). Instead, the number is on the back of the shank. The piece does not resemble the modern STMs for bari that I have seen and played. It has a wider beak, longer rollover baffle, thinner rails, and the chamber and sidewalls are slightly more scooped out. I think it is a "transitional" Babbitt piece but I can't verify that. All I know is that the thing sounds and plays like butter.
 
#19 ·
bfoster64 -- thanks for the info! I will investigate what bari Link you have.

Keep in mind that the chart was done for tenor mouthpieces so it might vary a bit for sop/alto/bari. It might need some tweaking here and there.

Thanks for making the thread sticky -- that's great!
 
#21 ·
Giganova said:
Yes I do. It's pretty tough to chit-chat with him, though :D
Hawkings lives in Cambridge where I do :D I see him around and about occassionally, he has a tendency to drive out of small alley ways quite quickly in his wheelchair, he ran over my old maths teachers toe once, that was his only claim to fame :D

but back to the mouthpiece chart, when do we get the HR one? ;) :twisted:
 
#25 ·
Another round of thanks. I missed this thread first time through. If you're chart is accurate, and I assume is, I've been correctly identifying mine as an early babbitt despite those who make claims to the contrary.

Now, in true SOTW fashion... about that "Hawkings thing... I think we should really add onto this thread with 30-40 posts about how you need to go back and listen to Webster, Young, Webster Young, Larry Young and Young MC in order to be an authority on anything. ;)

(cynical, moi?)
 
#26 ·
BayviewSax said:
If you're chart is accurate, and I assume is, I've been correctly identifying mine as an early babbitt despite those who make claims to the contrary.
I cannot guarantee that the chart is accurate, but I did the best I could.

Regarding the Florida vs Early Babbitt identification: This was the original motivation for the chart, especially since there are many Early Babbitt pieces advertised as Florida's on Ebay. In addition to the small/large font and NO USA vs USA stamp, there is another piece of information that is not in the chart, but mentioned on the Mouthpiece Museum Otto Link page: Florida Links were hand finished, and you can clearly see the marks from the sanding paper on the baffle/tip opening. By contrast, Early Babbitts are all finished on a machine and the baffle is much smoother and shinier. If I can, I will put pictures up that show this difference, which is a very clear indicator whether it is an Early Babbitt or Florida.

But anyway, this classification into an entire "zoo" of Otto Link mouthpieces doesn't tell you anything about how a mouthpiece actually sounds, which should be kept in mind. I have an Early Babbitt that outperformed every other (older and more expensive) Link I have ever played. In the end, it's all about the sound. :D
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top